mpra paper fdi

7/30/2019 MPRA Paper Fdi

1/19

Munich Personal RePEc Archive

FDI in Multi Brand Retail and

Employment Generation in India

Mohammed Nizamuddin

Center for Studies in Economics & Planning, School of Social

Science, Central University of Gujarat

20. April 2013

Online at http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/46383/

MPRA Paper No. 46383, posted 20. April 2013 14:28 UTC
http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/46383/http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/46383/http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/


2/19

FDI in Multi Brand Retail and Employment Generation in India

Mohammed NizamuddinResearch Scholar, Centre for studies in Economics & Planning, School of Social Science, Central University of

Gujarat, Sector-30, Gandhinagar, Gujarat-382030

ABSTRACT

In the present economic scenario, especially after global economic crisis, the condition of India s

balance of payment and trade deficit is very severe. Investment has made the need of hour to

bridge this gap. An attempt has been made in this paper, to discuss the need of opening up the

route of FDI in multi brand retail sector. The main purpose of this study is to analyse the role of

FDI in employment generation in Indian retail sector. Here we assumed that FDI as an

independent variable whereas employment as dependent variable. By using time series data from

2001-02 to 2009-10 and applying ordinary least square (OLS) method we find that FDI have

negative impact on employment generation in retail sector in India.

JEL CODES: F23;F34;35

Key Words:Foreign Direct Investment, Multi Brand Retail, Employment Generation, India.

1. INTRODUCTIONNow days, India is facing balance of payment and trade deficit problems continuously. This has

been made to bring about changes in Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) policy by Government of

Indian. Indian retailing is one of the most promising sectors with a lot of growth potential. Despite

the recent developments in retailing and its recognizable contribution to the economy, retailing

continues to be the least evolved industries. The growth of organized retailing in India has been

so slower as compared to rest of the world. Liberalization of trade policies during first reform

period has led India to become an investment friendly country. Foreign direct investment (FDI) in

this country considered critical importance in the context of this liberalization. According to the

Investment Commission of India, the retail sector is expected to grow almost three times its

current levels. It has made India the most attractive investment destination in the world. Indian

Retailindustry with a contribution of 14% to the national GDP and employing 7% of the total

workforce in the country after agriculture sector, the retail industry is one of the main pillars of

the Indian economy. The latest decision of the Government of allowing FDI in Indian retail

sector encourages the retailers and open up barriers to develop and leverage the resources and

capabilities of their supply chain partners to create superior value and competitive


3/19

advantages in the marketplace. FDI plays a very significant role for economic growth and

development through its strengthening of domestic capital, productivity and employment creation

and also it would undoubtedly enable India incorporates to integrate its economy with that of the

global economy. But a great debate has appeared against the Government plans for allowing

FDI in Retail sector by the small traders who beliefthat the opening up of foreign-sponsoreddepartmental outlets will not necessarily absorb them; rather they may try to establish the

monopoly power in the country. Therefore, as a matter of fact FDI in Indian retail sector should not

just be freely allowed but should be significantly encouraged with some restrictions. Thus FDIs will

provide opportunities to host countries to enhance their economic growth and optimize their

earnings by employing their ideal resources.

2. REVIEW OF LITERATUREMany studies have been found to analyse the impact of FDI on growth of the countries andemployment generation. The flows of FDI have a positive correlation with economic growth but

do not identify the mechanism to growth of economy and employment generation in India.

A study conducted by Mukherjee and Patel (2005) found that foreign retailers are working with

small manufacturers for in-house labels and are providing them technologies like packaging

technologies and bar coding. Sourcing from India has increased with the advent of foreign

retailers and they also bring in an efficient supply-chain management system. Joint ventures with

foreign retailers are helping the Indian industry to get access to finance and global best practices.Besides, retailing being a non-tradable service there is no possibility of improved efficiency

through import competition and foreign investment is the way forward.

Tanay Kumar Nandi and Ritankar Saher (2007) in their work made an attempt to study the

Foreign Direct Investment in India with a special focus on Retail Trade, This paper stresses the

need of FDI in India in retail sector and uses the augment that FDI is allowed in Multiple sectors

and The study also suggests that FDI in retail sector must be allowed. Bose, Jayashree (2007), the

book studied the sectoral analysis of India & China related to FDI Inflows. In his book, he lights

on the emerging issues on FDI inflows in India & China comparatively and also on the

globalization, foreign factors, trends & issues on FDI outflow from India and China.

M. Joseph and N. Soundararajan, (2009) The Indian Council for Research on International

Economic Relations (ICRIER) study has shown that hardly 1.7 per cent of small shops have

closed down due to competition from organized retail. They have competed successfully against


4/19

organized retail through adoption of better business practices and technology. FDI has positive

spillover effects on the economy as its ownership advantages get disseminated to locally owned

enterprises, enhancing their productivity. All these benefits of foreign direct investment have

been well proven in India in sectors such as automobiles, telecom and consumer electronics.

Khan A.Q. and Siddiqui Ahmad Taufeeque (2011) studied the impact of FDI on Indian

economy and a comparison with China & USA. The paper has also been ventured into carving

out set of strategies to deal with the issues & problems in attracting FDI for promotion & growth

of international trade. The double log model has been used to find elasticity between different

factors in this paper. They also highlight the impact of FDI on employment. In this research

paper, the discussion between FDI and GDP as to asses that FDI helps in boosting growth of a

country.

Bhanagade D.B, Shah A. Pallavi (2011), they said in their paper that the impact of FDI on

Indian Economy where they also emphasize on the investments, sectors attracting highest FDI

inflows and FDI leads to Generation of Employment opportunities. Therefore the growth of

inflow of FDI would lead to positive growth of Gross capital formation. In India, the growth of

GDP is largely influenced by FDI. As stated that the numerous studies have been conducted

related to FDI in different aspects of areas. But none of the studied reviewed by the researchers is

in context to the FDI in India and shows that how FDI affecting Indias growth and impact of

FDI inflows on growth of the economy in terms of different variables like GDP and employmentgeneration in India. Further, in the research paper double log model has been used to find out the

elasticity between the different indicators.

3. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY1. To explain the current status of FDI in Indian retail sector along with others.2. To study the need of opening up the route of FDI in Multi Brand Retail segment in

India.

3. To analysethe impact of FDI on employment generation in Indian retail sector.3.1 Hypothesis

Ho- The Null Hypothesis assumes that there is no significant relationship between FDI

inflow in retail sector and employment in Indian retail sector.

Ha- The Alternative Hypothesis accepts that there is significant relationship between

FDI inflow in retail sector and employment in Indian retail sector.


5/19

4. METHODOLOGY AND DATA SOURCESThe study is exploratory and quantitative in nature. The secondary information is extensively

used for analysis purpose. Further the secondary data pertaining to the study is originated from

various sources like National Sample Survey Organization (NSSO), SIA reports, newspapers,and websites of Reserve bank of India (RBI), Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion

(DIPP), Economic Survey 2010-11, 2011-12 and number of leading journals. In order to

compare the FDI inflow over the period under study, the percentage method and simple statistics

is used.

4.1 Statistical Tools Used to Test the Hypothesis

A log linear regression function has been applied to know the impact of FDI on Indian economic

growth in terms of GDP and Employment Generation in India. The degree of significance ofcoefficient of regression verifyby the application of T test. The strength of linear relationship

between the dependent variable and independent variable measured by the coefficient of

determination. The data analyzed in this paper has been scrutinized through statistical tools

&techniques.

4.2 Econometric Model

We use simple Ordinary Least Square (OLS) Method in the form of equation to investigate the

impact of FDI on employment. creation in Indian retail sector.Ln (EMP) + ln (FDI) + i

Where the employment in retail sector are taken as dependent variable while FDI in retail sector

as an independent variable. Further is intercept and is the parameters of the equation that link

together the dependent and independent variables, and is error term. In above equation natural

log values of variables are used to transform it into a linear equation and to facilitate the use of

ordinary least square method.

5. RETAIL SECTOR IN INDIAIn 2004, The High Court of Delhi defined the term retail as a sale for final consumption in

contrast to a sale for further sale or processing (i.e. wholesale), a sale to the ultimate consumer.

Thus, retailing can be said to be the interface between the producer and the individual consumer

buying for personal consumption. This excludes direct interface between the manufacturer and

institutional buyers such as the government and other bulk customers retailing is the last link that


6/19

connects the individual consumer with the manufacturing and distribution chain. A retailer is

involved in the act of selling goods to the individual consumer at a margin of profit. Division of

Retail Industry: The retail industry is mainly divided into

(i) Organized and(ii) Unorganized Retailing.

(i )Organi zed Retail ingOrganized retailing refers to trading activities undertaken by licensed retailers, those who have

registered for sales tax, income tax, etc. These include corporate-backed hypermarkets and retail

chains, and also privately-owned large retail businesses.

Single Brand Retail :Single Brand implies that foreign companies would be allowed to sell

goods sold internationally under a SingleBrand, viz., Reebok, Nokia and Adidas. FDI in

SingleBrand retail implies that a retail store with foreign investment can only sell one Brand.

For example, if Adidas were to obtain permission to retail its flagship Brand in India, those retail

outlets could only sell products under the Adidas Brand and not the Reebok Brand, for which

separate permission is required. If they get permission, Adidas could sell products under the

Reebok Brand in separate outlets.

Multi Brand Retail:FDI in Multi Brand retail implies that a retail store with a foreign

investment can sell Multiple Brands under one roof. Opening up FDI in Multi-Brand retail will

mean that global retailers including Wal-Mart, Carrefour and Tesco can open stores offering a

range of household items and grocery directly to consumers in the same way as the ubiquitous

kirana store.

(ii)Unorganized Retail ingUnorganized retailing refers to the traditional forms of low-cost retailing, for example, local

kirana shops, owner-operated general stores, paan/beedi shops, convenience stores, hand cart and

street vendors, etc.

6. CURRENT SCENARIO OF RETAILING INDUSTRY IN INDIAIn India, FDI scenario has been divided into two important retail segments, Single Brand

retailing and Multi Brand retailing. A section on the investment scenario of this market is also

highlighted; including investment and expansion plans, mergers and acquisitions, and partnership

agreements in the retail sector. The competition section provides an overview of the competitive


7/19

landscape in the market and includes a detailed profile of the major players. It begins with a

matrix showing the various retail formats under which the players operate in India. A bubble

chart for the public companies, depicting their relative positions in the market with respect to

total income, net profit/loss and market capitalization is included. Similarly, a bubble chart for

the private players is also included with respect to their total income, net profit/loss and totalassets. This section also includes list of products and services, key people, financial snapshot,

key ratios and key recent developments for all companies, along with key business segments and

key geographic segments for public companies. The report concludes with a section on strategic

recommendations which comprises of an analysis of the growth strategies of the retail market in

India.

Table-1 Foreign Di rect Investment (FDI ) Inf lows I nto India (From Apri l 2000 To June 2012)

S.

No. Financial Year

FDI Flows in India % Growth (in US

$Million)

(in Rs. Crore) (in US $ Million)

1 2000-2001 10733 4029 -

2 2001-2002 18654 6130 (+) 52%

3 2002-2003 12871 5035 (-) 18%

4 2003-2004 10064 4322 (-) 14%

5 2004-2005 14653 6051 (+) 40%6 2005-2006 24584 8961 (+) 48%

7 2006-2007 56390 22826 (+) 146%

8 2007-2008 98642 34843 (+) 53%

9 2008-2009 142829 41873 (+) 20%

10 2009-2010 123120 37745 (-) 10%

11 2010-2011 88520 34847 (-) 08%

12 2011-2012 173947 46553 (+) 34%

13

2012-2013 (up to

June) 23820 7698

-

CUMULATIVE TOTAL

(from April 2000-June 2012) 798827 260913

Source:Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion (DIPP) Fact sheet up dated up to June 2012,

Federal Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Government of India.


8/19

Table-1 Explains that FDI inflow from the year 2000 to 2012 in India. According to the data of

Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP) illustrate that FDI was US$ 4029 million

in the year 2000-01 that increased to US$ 6130 million with growth rate of 52 % in the year

2001-02. With the investment amounted to US$ 5035 million and US$ 4322 million with

negative growth rate of 18 % and 14 % respectively as it was noticed the downward trend inyears i.e. 2002-03 and 2003-04. The reason behind the negativity was the unfortunate 9/11 attack

in US leading to effect on almost all the countries worldwide. In most of the economies

including India the stock market went into bearish mode. Then the recovery in stock market

began from2004-2005 and2005-2006 with increasing rate of 40%and 48% and investment

amounted to US$ 6051 million and US$8961 million respectively. In the year 2006-2007, FDI

registered robotic growth rate of 146 % with investment amounting to US $ 22826 million.

During that period tremendous growth can be ascertained in Indian economy. This trend in the

rate of growth goes continued with investment amounting to US$ 34835 with growth rate of 53%

in the year2007-2008. In the succeeding year 2008-2009, the growth rate declined to the level of

20%. That is all because of global financial recession but it is satisfactory for India as compare to

other countries at least it is positive. Very Strong economic fundamentalsof Indian economy and

controlled privatization are able to maintain positive growth rate.The impact of financial crises

adversely affect the Indian economy as it is noticed that in the year 2009-2010 and 2010-2011,

the growth rate goes negative at -10% and -08% with investment amount of US $ 37745million

and US $ 34847million respectively. But in the year 2011-12 it has seen again bounced back

with a growth rate 34% and with investment amount of US $ 46553 million.

Table-2 Explains that country wise FDI inflows in India during the period of study. The table

shows that Mauritius is the most attractive country to invest in India. It only invest US $ 65608

million with 38% of total FDI inflow in India, followed by Singapore amounted US $ 17555

million with 10% of total FDI inflows. U.K and Japan have rank three and four respectively with

9% and 7% respectively followed by USA amounted US $ 10710 million with 6% of total FDI

inflows. Netherland, Cyprus, Germany and France occupied six, seven, eight and nine place in

terms of FDI inflows with 4%, 4%, 3% and 2% respectively and UAE participate as a foreign

investor in India having 10th place in ten countries table amounted US $ 2301 million with 1%

respectively. From the table it is also revealed that about 50% of total FDI inflows are invested

by Mauritius and Singapore. They play a very significant role in the overall development of

Indian economy


9/19

Table-2 Country Wise FDI Equity Inflow In India(From April 2000 To June 2012)

S.

No. COUNTRY

FDI Flows in India % of total inflows

(in US$ Million)

(in Rs. Crore) (in US $ Million)

1 MAURITIUS 297189 65608 38%2 SINGAPORE 79770 17555 10%

3 U.K. 76846 16314 9%

4 JAPAN 59785 12663 7%

5 U.S.A 48682 10710 6%

6 NETHERLAND 35209 7652 4%

7 CYPRUS 30762 6603 4%

8 GERMANY 22234 4880 3%

9 FRANCE 13709 2988 2%

10 U.A.E 10643 2301 1%

TOTAL FDI INFLOWS 798826 174835

Source:Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion (DIPP) Fact sheet up dated up to June 2012,


Table-3 Explains that the Sector wise Analysis of FDI in India reveals that maximum FDI has

attracted in the service sector including the telecommunication, information technology, travel

and many others with 19%. The service sector is followed by the construction development

sector with 12% in terms of FDI. The telecom industry is of the fastest growing industries in

India with 7% FDI inflows as it has the highest growth rate in the world, with a growth rate of

45%. The IT sector is one of the growing sectors in India. The FDI in computer software and

hardware is of 6% along with drugs and pharmaceuticals. Chemical other than fertilizers,

Automobile Industry, power and metallurgical industries have average investment in terms of

foreign direct investment. They have moderate rate of attraction of FDI with 5%, 4%, 4%, and

4% respectively. The petroleum and natural gas industry has helped in the development of thesector in India as ranks 10th with FDI Inflows of 3%. The cumulative FDI inflows reveal that

service sector attracts maximum FDI Inflows amounting to Rs. 151560 crores that followed by

the construction development amounting Rs. 95624 crores in India. These both sectors attract

more than 30% of the total FDI Inflows in India.

.


10/19

Table-3 Sector Attracting Highest FDI Equity Inflow in India (From April 2000 to June 2012)

S.

No. SECTOR

FDI Flows in India % to Total Inflows

(in US $ Million)(in Rs.

Crore)

(in US$

Million)

1 SERVICE SECTOR 151560 33428 19%

2

CONSTRUCTION

DEVELOPMENT 95624 21088 12%

3 TELECOMMUNICATIONS 57120 12560 7%

4

COMPUTER SOFTWARE &

HARDWARE 50557 11286 6%

5

DRUGS AND

PHARMACEUTICALS 45313 9659 6%

6

CHEMICALS OTHER THAN

FERTILIZERS 39236 8116 5%

7 POWER 33994 7444 4%

8 AUTOMOBILE INDUSTRY 31929 6965 4%

9 METALLURGICAL INDUSTRIES 28692 6374 4%

10 PETROLEUM & NATURAL GAS 23676 5139 3%

Source:DIPP (Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion) Fact sheet up dated up to June 2012,


As the Real Estate and Housing and the Construction industry are among the new attracting large

share of FDI in India. Thus the Sector wise Inflows of FDI in India shows varying trends but act

as a catalyst for growth, development and quality maintenance of Indian Industries to the huge

and greater extend. Though the sectors are the major sources of mobilizing FDI in India, plenty

of scope exists.

7. NEED FOR FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT IN MULTI BRAND RETAIL IN INDIAAs India is a developing country, capital has been one of the scare resources that are usually

required for economic development. Capital is limited and there are many issues such as Health,

poverty, employment, education, research and development, technology obsolesce, global

competition. The flow of FDI in India from across the world will help in acquiring the funds at

cheaper cost, better technology, employment generation, and upgraded technology transfer,


11/19

scope for more trade, linkages and spillovers to domestic firms. The following arguments are

advanced in favor of foreign direct investment.

Sustaining a High Level of Investment: As all the under-developed and the developingcountries want to industrialize and develop themselves, therefore it becomes necessary to raise

the level to investment substantially. Due to poverty and low GDP the saving are low.Therefore there is a need to fill the gap between income and savings through foreign direct

investments.

Technological Gap: In Indian scenario we need technical assistance from foreign source forprovision if expert services, training of Indian personnel and educational, research and training

institutions in the industry. It only comes through private foreign investment or foreign

collaborations.

Exploitation of Natural Resources: In India we have abundant natural resources such as coal,iron and steel but to extract the resources we require foreign collaboration.

Understanding the Initial Risk: In developing countries as capital is a scare resource, the riskof investments in new ventures or projects for industrialization is high. Therefore foreign

capital helps in these investments which require high risk.

Development of Basic Economic Infrastructure: In the recent years foreign financialinstitutions and Government of advanced countries have made substantial capital available to

the under developed countries. FDI will help in developing the infrastructure by establishing

firms different parts of the country. There are special economic zones which have been

developed by Government for improvising the industrial growth.

Improvement in the Balance Of Payments Position: The inflow FDI will help in improvingthe balance of payment. Firms which feel that the goods produced in India will have a low cost,

will produce the goods and export the same to other country. This helps in increasing the

exports.

Foreign Firms Helps in increasing The Competition: Foreign firms have always come upwith better technology, process, and innovations comparing with the domestic firms. Theydevelop a completion in which the domestic firms will perform better it survive in the market.

8. EMPLOYMENT GENERETION IN RETAIL SECTOR OF INDIAThe Indian Governments goal of attracting FDI was particularly motivated by low domestic

savings rates accompanied by inefficient financial intermediation, which hampered their


12/19

strategies to finance growth. The other motivation behind FDI was the opportunity to benefit

from the direct and indirect effects of FDI on increasing demand for labour.

Table-4 Occupational Condition in India

GENDER

UNDER

EMPLOYED

% OF DAYS

UNEMPLOYED

WANT

ADDITIONALWORK

WANT

ALTERNATIVEWORK

URBAN

MALE 1.4 3.9 5.8 4.9

FEMALE 1.4 15.4 1.2 0.9

RURAL

MALE 7.4 8.4 26 23.2

FEMALE 16 30.8 6.6 5.8

TOTAL 26 NA 40 35

Sources: NSSO SURVEY: Employment and unemployment situation in India 2009-10

POPULATION LABOUR FORCE % OF NOT EMPLOYED

INDIA 1177 430 28.3

MALE 609 329 20.1

FEMALE 568 102 8.3

URBAN 351 123 7.1

MALE 184 101 5.2

FEMALE 166 21 1.9

RURAL 828 306 20.8

MALE 425 228 18.2

FEMALE 401 79 5.1

Sources:NSSO Survey all figures are in million

This is especially important given a chronic unemployment that the India suffers from. The level

of unemployment in any country has economic and social implications. From the economic

point of view, the overall unemployment rate remains one of the key measures of an economys

performance. However, unemployment rate is not only of economic significance but also of social

significance as well since it is also a key variable in alleviating poverty. For instance, the

Indias National Bureau of Statistics (2007) indicates that the overall unemployment rate in

India was 11.0 for the population aged 10 years and above. The current problem of youth


13/19

unemployment in India has been addressed by establishing foreign production facilities, which

engage youths in the values creation. It was expected that foreign firms that use labour intensive

production methods would absorb many of the youths, through either direct employments or

indirect employments. Prior studies have used cross-country data; however, none of the past studies

have focused solely on India. The results of prior studies on the relationship between FDI andemployment creation of host country are mixed. Considering the importance of the unemployment

problem in India and the potential impact that FDI can have on employment generation on one

hand, and the scarcity of studies covering the subject in India on the other hand, the present study

has utilized data-set from India to examine the impact of FDI on employment

generation/creation. Thus, the present study attempts to create a better understanding of the

relationship between foreign direct investment inflows and their effects on employment creation in

India. In 11th and 12th plans, the planning commission is targeting the creation of about 116 million

jobs, which would absorb the 85 million rises in the labour force and cover some of the existing gab

between jobs and job seekers. Through FDI in Multi Brand retail sector, the Government wants to

create 10 million new jobs opportunities addressed the nation by the Prime Minister of India. But it

can be happened only if the projected number of new jobs materialized. Equally the benefits of these

new jobs can accrue only if the people with the relevant skills are available.

Table-5 Percentage Growth of Total Employment Generation in Organized Retail Sector in India.

S.No. Year

Total Employment in

Public & Private Sector

Total Employment

in Retail Sector

% of Total Retail

Employment

1 2000-01 27960000 493000 -

2 2001-02 27790000 502000 (+) 02%

3 2002-03 27205000 492000 (-) 02%

4 2003-04 27001000 542000 (+) 10%

5 2004-05 26443000 532000 (-) 02%

6 2005-06 26459000 559000 (+) 05%

7 2006-07 26959000 569000 (+) 02%8 2007-08 27242000 588000 (+) 03%

9 2008-09 27512000 437000 (-) 26%

10 2009-10 28086000 646000 (+) 48%

Sources:Ministry of Labour& Employment, Director General of Employment and Training, Economic

Survey 2011-2012


14/19

TABLE 5 Reveal that the overall employment generation in retail sector in India with respect to

total employment generation in India. The total employment in retail sector in India increased

except in the year 2002-03, 2004-05 it decline with 2% each respectively. Further it increases in

the year 2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08 with overall 5%, 2% and 3% respectively.It has been

clearly shown by the table, here we also found the recession and financial crises effect in year2008-09 with a decline of 26% in the total generation of employment opportunities in India. In

the succeeding year 2009-10 it is also clear from the above data that the employment in retail

sector grow with recognizable rate of 48 percent.

9. ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATIONHypothesis

Ho-The Null Hypothesis assumes that there is no significant relationship between


Ha-The Alternative Hypothesis accepts that there is significant relationship between


Model Summary

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate

1 .410a .168 .049 .3250771

a. Predictors: (Constant), LNFDI

TABLE-6.2 Impact of FDI inflow onEmployment

Coefficientsa

Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients T Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

1 (Constant)

Ln (FDI)

3.178

-.096

1.091

.081 -.410

2.914

-1.118

.023

.274

a. Dependent Variable: Ln (EMP);b. Source:Through SPSS, Based on Appendix-1In order to test the hypothesis, the variables have been converted into natural log where FDI has

been taken as independent variable and natural log of employment (EMP) as a dependent

variable. Regression result shows that overall model is significant at 2% level of significance

with T value of 2.914 and on the other hand constant i.e. dependent variable is significant at 27%


15/19

level of significance with T value of -1.118. The value of R and adjusted R square are somewhat

high (0.410) which suggest that the 59% variation in this model is unexplained and remaining

variables are explained by FDI in this model. It is stated that there is a negative impact of FDI on

employment and some other unknown factors also plays significant role. In above table, the B

value is 0.226% which indicates that the elasticity between FDI and GDP is 0.226%. It resultedthat 1 % increase in FDI leads to -0.096 % decrease in employment. If FDI increases 10 % then

it may increase the GDP growth rate by -0.96%. Therefore the null hypothesis is accepted and

alternative hypothesis is rejected as there is not significant impact of FDI on employment in

Indian retail sector.

10.LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDYThe study suffers from the following limitations:

The study is limited to India. Hence the result arrived from the study may or may not be applied

to other countries. This study covers only the limited cap of the FDI inflow which is time

bounding study. The study is based on time series data covering the period 2001-02 to 2009-10

and valid for only that period of time. Although India has open its hand for FDI from first

economic reform period. Therefore the result cant be generalised for FDI flow in other

challenging sectors. This study does not cover more than 90 percent employment in India. The

generalisation of the findings of the study is subject to limitations of FDI is not only responsible

for economic growth. The study also ignores other variables which play a vital role in the

economic growth and development.

11.SUGGESTIONSThe national commission must be established to study the problems of the retail sector and to

evolve policies that will enable it to cope with FDI as and when it comes. To provide greater

benefits to economy there should be stiff local sourcing requirements and investments in

backend infrastructure should be compulsory. Opening up of FDI should be done in a calibrated

manner. So that domestic retail both organised and unorganised get breathing space and are able

to upgrade their practices. FDI in Multi Brand Retail should not limited in big cities, to provide

rural youths opportunities to get fruitful employment in retail sector. The condition must be

aimed at encouraging the purchase of goods in the domestic market size and specify details like

constructions and standard storage etc. Entry of foreign players must be slow and with special

safeguard so that the effect of the labour displacement can be analysed and policy fine turned.


16/19

After completion of detail study on FDI in Multi Brand Retail and employment generation in

India. I have reach at the point of discussion that FDI should be allowed in various sectors in

India to resolve many problems related to retail sector. My suggestion is that FDI should be

allowed in a restrictive manner in India like china. FDI has to fulfill certain terms and conditions

for getting permission there to start business in retail sector. These term and conditions are as- If FDI allowed carrying on it business in Multi Brand Retail sector then 80% of the total

staff should be from India.

Profit cant be transferred to trading companies country for at least first five year. Thatshould be fully utilized in building up infrastructure, transportation, increasing

productivity and other facilities related to the retail sector.

Monetary transactions should be done through Indian Banks only so as to increase thecredit facility to Indian farmers..

First priority should be given to the Indian goods and products produced by Indianincorporate for consumption purpose. Thus FDIs the best solution to bridge the current

account deficit, will help in curbing inflation, driving the development, inclusive and

equitable growth and create employment opportunities.

12.CONCLUSIONTo summarise the debate on opening up FDI in Multi Brand Retail, there is sincere expectation

that government has opened the boundaries to overseas investment in the retail sector. At present

it is also not desirable to increase FDI ceiling to more than 51 percent for single brand retail. The

government has already increased 100 percent in single brand retail and 51 percent in multi

brand retail. The sector should opened gradual and phased manner. It will help us to ensure

check and control on business operations of global retails and look after the interest of the

domestic players. Foreign players should not allow trading in certain sensitive products like arms

and ammunition, defence equipment etc. and the list of excluded goods should be clearly stated

in the FDI policy. Once India get integrated into global economy with FDI in multi brand retail

sector it will be placed an advantage if it is made mandatory for foreign retailers to bring with

them technology and management know how. Human resources will be developed as these

investments provide education and training to the people employed by them there is a great

scope of employment generation. As these retail outlets will need manpower to run them. The

purpose of the study is discussing the need of opening up the route of FDI in multi brand retail

sector. But the main aim of this study is to analyse the role of FDI in employment generation in


17/19

Indian retail sector. Here we assumed that FDI as an independent variable whereas employment

as dependent variable. By using time series data from 2001-02 to 2009-10 and applying ordinary

least square (OLS) method we find that FDI will have negative impact on employment

generation in retail sector in India because the result shows that 10% increase in FDI inflow in

retail sector it will decrease the approximately 1% in jobs. Thus these results are not according toour expectation. The results of the study cant be generalised to all developing countries because

all countries have their own local changing aspects. Furthermore the researcher can modify the

model in various contests as per their research requirements.

REFERENCES

BOOKS

Bajaj Chetan, Tuli Rajnish, Srivastava Nidhi, Retail Management, Oxford University Press, NewDelhi, 2006, pp 185-190

Berman B. & Evans J.R, (2007), Retail Management-A strategic approach, Prentice Hall of

India Private Limited, New Delhi, Tenth edition,.

Jim Dion & Ted Topping, Retailing,Jaico Publishing House, p.p127-150.

Sheikh A. & Fatima K,(2008), Retail Management, Himalaya Publishing House, First edition

New Delhi,.

Levy Weitz. Retailing Management, Tata McGraw Hills Company Ltd New Delhip.p472-502.

Michael .J. Baker, The Marketing Book, Fourth edition.Viva Books Private ltdp.p 639-667.

Michael R. Solomon, Elnora.W Stuart, 2005 Marketing Real people, Real choices, Pearson

Education, Ltd.p.p563-564.

Suja NairRetail Management, Himalaya Publishing House, p.p 401-429.

Swapna Pradhan, Retailing Management Text& Cases, Tata McGraw Hills Company p.p127-

141,342-350.

RESEARCH PAPERS/REPORTS

Assocham India, Indias experience with FDI: Role of a Game Changer, Published in

January 2012.

AkhterShahid, Equbal Iftekhar, Organized Retailing in India Challenges and Opportunities,

International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Vol.2 Issue1, January 2012, ISSN 2231


18/19

5780.

A.T. Kearneys Report on Indian Retail, 2008.

Bhanagade, D.B and Shah, Pallavi A. (2011), Study of Impact of FDI on Indian Economy,

International Referred Research Journal volume-II.

Blomstrom and kokko (2003),The Economic Foreign Direct Investment incentive.Working

paper 9489 NBER.

Blomstromel.1992, Borensztein, Gregoria and lee 1998, de mello 1999, Gregoria 1992, lin

2001.

Bisaria Gaurav, Foreign Direct Investment in Retail in India, International Journal of

Engineering and Management Research, Vol. 2, Issue-1, Jan 2012 ISSN No.: 2250-0758 Pages: 31-

36

Charles, W. L. (2003), I nternational Business -

Competing in the Global Marketplace, 4thEdition, New York: Tata McGraw Hill

Chaturvedi, Illa (2011), Role of FDI in Economic Development of India: Sectoral Analysis,

International Conference on Technology & Business.

Dr. R. K Balyan, FDI in I ndian Retail- Benefi cial or Detrimental, Research paper, Journal of

Marketing and Communication, September-December, 2007, volume 3, Issue 21, pp. 45-47

Debajani Sahoo, Hari Govind Mishra, Organized Retail in India: A case study of Wal-Mart, Indian

Journal of Marketing, Jnuary,2008, pp 35-36

Damayanthi/ S.Pradeep kumar,FDI is it the Need of the Hour?Google search

Dipakkumar Dey- Aspects of Indian Economy-Google search

Kamboj Poonam, Indian Retail Industry: Its Growth, Opportunities and Challenges, IJRFM,

Volume 2, Issue 2 (February 2012) (ISSN 2231-5985)

Khan.A.Q & Siddiqui Ahmad, Taufeeque (2011), Impact of FDI on Indian Economy: A

Comparison with Chi na &USA. International Journal of Business & Information technology,

vol-1 no 1 2011.

Sanyal Prithvi Raj, Singh Nidhi & Tripathi Sourabh, An Updates of Issues, Challenges and

Opportunities in FDI in India, ICOQM-10, June 28-30, 2011


19/19

APPENDICES

APPENDIX-1

FDI inflow in retail sector and employment in retail sector in India during

the period from 2001-02 to 2009-10

S. No. YEARS FDI EMP LNFDI LNEMP1 2001-02 155100 4.93 11.9518 1.5953

2 2002-03 123500 5.42 11.724 1.6901

3 2003-04 198600 5.32 12.199 1.6715

4 2004-05 239900 5.59 12.388 1.721

5 2005-06 2104700 5.69 14.5597 1.7387

6 2006-07 1031300 5.88 13.8463 1.7716

7 2007-08 2851600 4.37 14.8634 1.4748

8 2008-09 2077600 6.46 14.5467 1.8656

9 2009-10 1553900 6.77 14.2563 1.9125

Source:Compiled by the Authors from Economic Survey of 2010-2011 & CSO and FDI fact sheet of

DIPP from September, 2005 to April, 2011. LNFDI = Natural Log of FDI Inflow of retail sector, and

LNEMP = Natural Log of Employment generation in retail sector.

mpra paper fdi

Documents